the Church whose Officer he is to a disorder'd Error if he cleave not to the Institution which is to Dip. What abundance of Betrayers of the Truth and Church too have we in these days How little is the Institution or Practice of the Primitive Christians minded amongst many good Men and where is the Spirit of Reformation And doubtless that famous Author and Learned Critick Casaubon was in the right will you have his words I doubt not saith he but contrary to our Churches Intention this Error having once crept in is maintained still by the Carnal Ease of such as looking more at themselves than at God stretch the Liberty of the Church in this case deeper and further than either the Church her self would or the Solemness of this Sacrament may well and safely admit Afterwards further saith I confess my self unconvinced by Demonstration of Scripture for Infants Sprinkling But Oh! how hard is it to retract an Error which has been so long and generally received especially when there is Carnal Ease and Profit attending the keeping of it up and when the contrary Practice I mean dipping is look'd upon so contemptible a thing and those who do it are daily by the ignorance of foolish Men reproached and vilified as it is now as well as in former days Acts. 8. 38. And they went both down into the Water both Philip and the Eunuch and he baptized him We may see saith Calvin what fashion the Ancients had to administer Baptism for they plunged the whole Body into the Water The use with us is now saith he that the Minister casts a few drops of Water only upon the Body o◠upon the Head. And upon John's baptizing in Aenon near Salim Joh. 3. 23. saith the same Calvin From this place we may gather that John and Christ administred Baptism by plunging the whole Body into the Water The Learned Cajetan upon Mat. 3. 5. saith Christ ascended out of the Water therefore Christ was baptized by John not by sprinking or by pouring Water upon him but by Immersion that is by dipping or plunging into the Water Moreover Musculus on Mat. 3. calls Baptism Dipping and saith the Parties baptized were dipped not sprinkled Object But it is still objected Sprinkling is Baptizing say you what you will and Baptism signifies Sprinkling as well as Dipping Answ To this we always answer and again say and testify that the Greek word to sprinkle is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rantizo and that the Translators themselves never so much as once in all the New Testament render Baptism Sprinkling and where is the Man that affirms the word signifies Sprinkling Object But the word Baptizo will bear VVashing Answ VVe answer then 'T is such washing as is done by dipping so much as is baptized or washed is dip'd and your Rantism is no washing and we also say and that too with good Authority that though the word Baptizo doth sometimes allow of that Acceptation yet it is not the direct immediate genuine and primary signification of it for that is to dip or plunge as you see in the Lexicons But at the best 't is but indirectly collaterally by the by as one observes so meant or improperly and remotely that it so signifies And we ask Whether when we try any Matter by the signification of the word as 't is in the Original we shall go to the direct original prime and proper or to the occasional remote indirect and improper signification to be tried by Your practice it seems is built only upon the indirect improper and remote acceptation of the word and therefore is at best only an uncouth indirect improper and far-fetch'd practice and indeed as the word is found in Scripture respecting Christ's Ordinance of Baptism it is evident to all what it signifies Object But the Pharisees Mark 7. 4. held the washing of Hands Vessels Cups Pots and Beds c. and there VVashings are called Baptism Answ Yea and what then for saith Mr. Wilson to baptize is to dip or plunge primarily and signifies such a washing as is used in Bucks wherein Linnen is plunged and dip'd and thus they wash'd their Vessels Hands and Cups viz. they swilled rinsed cleansed and totally washed dip'd or wetted them all over with VVater or else you may be sure it could never be said they baptized them But Sirs who-ever washes Hands Cups Pots or Beds by sprinkling a few Drops of VVater upon them there is no washing by such a kind of Sprinkling O that you would give over such Arguing since the practice of Baptism in the Primitive Times doth as you have heard evidently shew that the Baptized were always dipped all over in VVater Certainly 't is no Baptism at all if not so administred Object Doth it follow that we must Baptize so now That was in a hot Country but we live in a cool Climate and when Children were Dipt some of them died and God will have Mercy not Sacrifice Answ Ought you not to make God's VVord your Rule Have you a Dispensation to make the Commandments of God void by your Traditions VVe conclude the Institution of Christ and the Practice of the Primitive Church ought to be followed in all things as near as we can But you say this is a cold Climate Pray Sirs did not Christ when he gave forth his Commission to his Apostles to teach and make Disciples and Baptize bid them go into all the World and into all Nations VVere they not to go into cold Countries as well as Hot And were they not to teach the same Doctrine and administer the same Ordinances alike where-ever they come Or did he tell them they should Baptize those in hot Countries that were Disciples and Rantize such who received the Word in cold Countries Unless you can prove this I am sure all you say is nothing Certainly you were as good never pretend to Baptize but wholly deny it and cast it off as a low and carnal Thing as some do as to do another thing in the room of it which Christ never commanded and call it his Ordinance Which we do declare and testify by the Authority of God's VVord and a great Cloud of VVitnesses who all understand the Greek Tongue may be better than some of you do that 't is no Baptism at all but a thing of Man's devising brought in in the room of Christ's Baptism and unjustly fathered upon him Sirs How dare you In the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost say I Baptize thee c. when you do but Rantize the Person for you neither dip the Person nor wash him Has the Holy Trinity given you any Authority so to do For God's sake for time to come use the Names of those Persons by whose Authority it was first set on foot and given forth till you can shew you have Authority from Jesus Christ to sprinkle or pour a little VVater upon the Face of a poor Infant or an adult
any proof in the least i. e. that Christ must allow them an Ordinance because he shewed them the favour to take them up into his Arms. 'T is said he look'd upon the young Man and loved him must he therefore make him a Member of his Church whether he was sitly qualified for it or no Christ shewed many great Favours unto divers Persons that we do not read he admitted into his Church He may shew one Favour to you and yet deny you another which you may not be capable of receiving Young Children saith Luther hear not nor understand the Word of God out of which Faith cometh and therefore if the Commandment be followed Children ought not to be baptized Besides they might be Children able to receive Instruction as far as you know for such we take some times up into our Arms. Tertulllan speaking of this place saith Indeed the Lord said do not ye hinder them to come unto me let them come therefore while they grow to Years let them come while they learn and while come let them be taught let them become Christians when they are able to know Christ Why doth innocent Age hasten to the Remission of Sins Men will deal more wâ—rily in Worldly Assairs so that they who are not trusted with an Earthly Inheritance are trusted with an Heavenly one let them ask for Salvation that thou mayst appear to have given it to him See our further Answer to this Text Coap 9. Object 4. But Infants were commonly baptized before How can we saith Mr. Smythies imagine that our Saviour sent to baptize Nations in which Infants before had commonly been baptized and yet intend they should be excluded Answ This is a new kind of Argument but proves nothing For first 'T is denied that Infants by any Command of God were ever baptized in any Nation no not amongst the Jews much less among the Gentile Nations but if they had been baptized before he might as well have inâ—erred and much better Infants Right to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and have said Can we imagine Christ would have excluded them from that considering they were before admitted to the Passeover which there is no great cause to question But secondly We reason thus If they were before baptized either they were baptized as it was a Jewish Rite and Custom or else as an Heathenish one If Baptism of Infants before was a Jewish Rite it was either appointed of God or else a Tradition of their own If it was a Tradition of their own can you suppose our Saviour would go about to own and establish a Jewish Innovation or one of their human Traditions and if it were an Appointment of God it is very much that no Man ever found it out before in all the Old Testament But thirdly If there had been any such legal Ordinance it had been abrogated with all other Jewish Ceremonies which stood as the Apostle shews in Meats and Drinks and divers Washings and Carnal Ordinances imposed on them until the time of Reformation All those divers Washings that were under the Law it is evident ceased in the Establishment of the new Testament and therefore how abominable false is that which Mr. Smythies says concerning Gospel-Baptism Object 5. Our Saviour says he Pag. 88. took this Ordinance from the Custom of the Jews who were wont to baptize those who forsook Heathenism and embraced the true Religion And whensoever they made Proselytes they did not only baptize the Parent but the Child likewise Answ Did any Man assert till now the Baptism of Christ to be a Legal Rite or rather that it sprung from Human Tradition for 't is evident the Jews were not required to baptize them by any Appointment of God for Circumcision was the Rite by which Proselytes who were Males were added to the Jewish Church Besides doth not our Saviour plainly intimate that John's Baptism was directly from Heaven and not of Men And if Baptism had been so frequently practised amongst the Jews wherefore did they say to John Why dost thou baptize if thou art not that Christ nor Elias Joh. 1. 25. But doth not Christ say that the Doctrine he taught he received from the Father who sent him not from Moses nor the Jews I have not spoken saith he of my self but the Father which sent me gave me Commandment what I should say and what I should speak Now Baptism is positively called a Principle of his Doctrine it was he that instituted it and gave it forth Mat. 28. 19 20. as a pure Gospel-Ordinance as the alone Soveraign Lord and Law-giver of his Church Moreover if all those divers Washings and carnal Ordinances amongst the Jews are abolished as you heard before how came this supposed Jewish Rite to escape These things considered we may perceive 't is Ignorance through Tradition that makes a Pedo-baptist or rather a No-Baptist and not Ignorance as he affirms through length of time that makes an Anabaptist falsly so called Pag. 91. But 't is the knowledg of God's Word through the help of the Spirit by which they whom he so calls come to cast off that unwritten Tradition of Babes Rantism and to own no Baptism but that which Christ hath commanded and was practised in the Apostolical Church And whereas he affirms the baptizing of Children was all along used in the Primitive Church by the Holy Martyrs c. We answer It was never practised till the Church came to adulterate the holy Institutions of Christ and fell away to Error and Superstition For saith Curcellaeus in the two first Centuries after Christ Infant-Baptism was altogether unknown but in the third and fourth it was allowed by some few in the fifth and following Ages it was generally received into Custom And if the Custom of the Church is enough to justify Infant-Baptism it will oblige us as to receive many other Traditions or Ceremonies likewise Object 6. But there are divers very learned Men who hold Infant-Baptism Answ And are there not many very learned Men who are against baptizing them who say 't is an Invention of Men and no Ordinance of Jesus Christ Besides were not the Pharisees and Lawyers learned Men who rejected the Counsel of God against themselves being not baptized God's purpose is to confound the Wisdom of Man. If Learning once comes to be made an Idol of God may leave those learned Men to themselves and let them grope in Mid-day as in the Night notwithstanding all their Light Knowledg and Learning Besides there are learned Men of all Opinions many learned Cardinals Priests and Jesuits in the Church of Rome yet you will not make that an Argument to believe Transubstantiation and other Errors maintained by them Object 6. But there are many very holy and pious Men yea Pastors of Churches that are for the baptizing of little Infants Nay and why should so few learned Men be of your way if it were a Truth for most speak
without the Profession of a saving Faith or any Precept for so doing then must we not baptize any without But saith he the Antecedent is true therefore so is the Consequent 1. I have saith he shewed you John required the Profession of true Repentance and that his Baptism was for Remission of Sins 2. When Christ layeth down the Apostolical Commission the Nature and Order of the Apostles Work it is first â—o make them Disciples and then to baptize them in the Name c. That it was saving Faith that was required of the Jews and profest by them Acts 2. 38. is plain in the Text. The Samaritans believed and had great Joy and were baptized c. The Condition upon which saith he the Eunuch must be baptized was if he believed with all his Heart Paul was baptized after Conversion Acts 9. 18. The Holy Ghost fell on the Gentiles before they were baptized Acts 10. 44. Lydia's Heart was opened before she was baptized and was one the Apostle judged faithful Acts 16. 14. So he goes over with all the Scriptures we have mentioned proving they were Believers and none else that all along in the New Testament were baptized 't is strange to me that the Man should have such clear Light and plead for the Commission and the Practice of the Primitive Christians and yet dare attempt to sprinkle Children having neither a Command from Christ or a Precedent from the Apostles for any such thing Object I know 't is objected Baptism was administred only to Believers in the Apostles time but that was the Infancy of the Church Answ I am not a little troubled to hear any Man to argue after this manner for though it be granted in the Apostles days the Church was newly constituted and so might be said to be new born yet to say that was the Infancy of the Church as Infancy imports in our common Acceptation Weakness or Imperfection is a false and foolish Assertion 1. Because that was in truth the time of the Churches greatest Glory Perfection and Beauty and very soon after the Apostles fell asleep the Church though she grew older yet she decayed and Corruptions crept in the Church might in that respect be compared to a glorious Flower that as soon as ever it is blown and quite put forth it is in its Glory and let it stand a while and it soon fades and loses much of its Lustre and Beauty even so did the Church of God and it was foretold also by the Apostles it would so after their departure come to pass by the entring in of grievous Wolves who should not spare the Flock i. e. the Church nay the Spirit of Antichrist Paul saith or Mystery of Iniquity did even then work in the Apostles days And St. John speaks to the same purpose Little Children it is the last time and as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come even now are there many Antichrists whereby we know that this is the last time and indeed all generally believe the Church continued not a pure Virgin to Christ much longer than one hundred Years after his Death now then shall any presume to say that was the Infancy of the Church as if the Church arrived to clearer Light Strength and Glory in after-Times But 2. Had not the Gospel-Church in that Age the extraordinary Apostles with it like to whom never any rose after to succeed them nay such who were conversant with the Lord Jesus after he rose from the Dead and spake to him mouth to mouth and did eat and drink with them as Peter saith Acts 10. 3. Had not the Church then extraordinary Gifts nay such an infallible Spirit and Presence of Christ with her that her Sons could clearly discern Spirits and know when they speak and when the Spirit spake in them Now speak I not the Lord. 4. Was not that Church set up to be a Patern or perfect Copy after which all succeeding Churches were to write can we think that others ever attained to the like much less to greater Light and Knowledg than they These things considered fully shew the folly and weakness of this Assertion and Objection But if Believers were the only Subjects of Baptism in the Primitive Time and this was according to the Commission of Christ and Practice of those days how came this Order and Administration to be altered and changed I mean by whose Authority nay and which is worst of all if that Infant-Baptism may be deem'd to be a Divine Rite or an Ordinance of God sith 't is not recorded in the Scripture nor practised in the Apostles Time it renders not only the Gospel-Church weak and imperfect but Christ himself unfaithful or less faithful than Moses who was but the Servant and yet lest nothing dark or unwritten which God commanded him but did do every thing exactly according to the Patern shewed him in the Mounâ— Nay and by the same Argument since Infant-Baptism was not instituted by Christ noâ— practised in the Primitive Church and yet may be admitted as a Divine Ordinance of Christ and so practised by Christians why may not all or many other Rites and Sacraments owned and maintained in the Romish Church be admitted also But Object I have heard some say Is it my where forbid Answ To which I answer where are such things as Crossings Salt Spittle and Sureties c. forbid At this Door what Inventions and Innovations may not come in or be admitted of such a dangerous Consequence is this that it would undo us all Object But say you at that time i. e. at the first preaching the Gospel and planting Churches Adult Persons were baptized only because they were before they believed either Jews or Heathens but when they believed and were baptized their Children had a right to Baptism likewise Answ This is soon said but hardly nay not at all to be proved For it cannot be their Childrens right without Authority or Command from Christ for if we should grant all our Brethren say concerning Abraham's Seed and of their Childrens being in Covenant this will not justify their Practice of baptizing them if they argue thus till Dooms-day except Christ hath left them a Precept or his Church a Precedent so to do for Abraham's Seed though they were such a thousand times over had no right to Circumcision until he received the word of Command to circumcise them from the great God. Nor had Lot and other godly Men in that day any right to that Ceremony who were not of Abraham's Family because God limited his Command to himself his Sons and Servants or such who were bought with Mony and so came into his House Secondly We desâ—re it may be considered that the History we have of the Gospel-Church in the Apostles days from the first planting of the Church at Jerusalem till St. John received his Revelations contains more than â—ifty Years and there was no â—ewer than three thousand Persons
Almighty God Jesus Christ nor his Apostles neither commended for baptizing any one Child or Children nor reproved for neglecting to baptize such then Infants Baptism is not of nor from God. But no Man or Woman was at any time or times either commended by the Almighty God c. for baptizing any one Child or Children nor reproved for neglecting to baptize such Ergo Infants Baptism is not of nor from God. This Argument remains good and unanswerable unless they can shew us that there is some Gospel-Ordinance and universal Duty injoyned on Men that no Man or Woman was ever commended for doing it nor reproved for neglecting it when they can shew that this Argument will be invalid That Doctrine that reflects upon the Honour Care and Faithfulness of Jesus Christ our blessed Mediator and glorious Law-giver or renders him less faithful then Moses and the New Testament in one of its great Ordinances nay Sacraments to lie more dark and obscure in God's Word than any Law or Ordinance of the Old Testament did cannot be of God. But the Doctrine of Infants Baptism reflects upon the Honour Care and Faithfulness of Jesus Christ c. or renders him less faithful than Moses and the New Testament in one of its great Ordinances nay Sacraments to lie more dark and obscure in God's Word than any Law or Ordinance of the Old Testament Ergo Infants Baptism cannot be of God. The Major certainly none will deny The Minor is easily proved Can any thing reflect more upon the Honour of Christ c. than this as if he should neglect to speak out his Mind and Will to us plainly or be so careless about it that sorry Man is forc'd to try his Wit to supply what is defective and wanting in this Matter in Christ's Word for he is strangely left of God and benighted who will not confess Infant Baptism to need much of humane Craft and Cunning to make it out from Christ's New Testament and when he has done all he leaves it as doubtful as he found it in the Judgment of indifferent Persons Did Moses deal thus with the Children of Israel No no. How careful was he to deliver every Law Statute and Ordinance exactly particularly the Law of the Passover Do but read how careful and circumspect he was in that in all respects and matters relating to it Nay and the Wisdom of God was such to leave nothing then in the dark but gave order that all Things might be made plain that he that run might read it and he that did read might know the Duty i. e. the Statuâ—e or Ordinance tho in many things they might need instruction how in a right Spirit to be found in it and what it signified But I dare affirm no Man who reads the New Testament from the beginning of Matthew to the end of the Revelations a thousand times over shall ever from that Holy Word or any place or part of it find it to be his Duty to baptize his Child the Word of God is powerful in convincing Men of their Duties as well as of their Sins but in this it fails it has no Power to convince Mens Consciences The Faith of Persons must stand in the Wit and Subtilty of Men in respect of Infant-Baptism and not in the Power of God and efficacy of his blessed Word Let some shew us the Person who only by reading the New Testament was convinced of Infant-Baptism though 't is true divers by reading of the Writings of Learned Men and their subtil and sophistical Arguments for so I must call them have been perswaded to believe it to be of God. Yet after all some of them have plainly signified the great Ground and Argument they build upon is this viz. Because such and such Learned Godly and Wise Men assert it to be a Truth of Christ So that it appears very clear they build their Faith herein not upon the Authority of God's Word but upon the Credit and Authority of Men. But certainly it must needs as I said reflect upon the Honour and Faithfulness of Christ to conclude Infant-Baptism to be of God for can any think the Lord Jesus would leave so great an Ordinance or Sacrament of the New Testament so obscure and dark in his Sacred Word had it been his Mind that Believers should baptize their Children since the Apostle magnifies Christ's Faithfulness who is the Son above that of Moses who was but the Servant And Moses verily was faithful in all his House as a Servant for a Testimony of those things which were to be spoken after Hebr. 3. 5. But Christ as a Son over his own House c. ver 6. and therefore was counted worthy of more glory than Moses ver 3. Besides do but consider what Darkness and Confusion the Asserters of Infant-Baptism seem to be in about the Proof and Right they say Children have to it 1. Some of them say it depends wholly upon the Authority of the Church 2. Others dare not baptize them but as Believers and Disciples and therefore affirm they have Faith c. 3. Others can't believe this and therefore though they likewise baptize them as Believers yet get Sureties to stand for them 4. Others say they have a Right by the Faith of their Parents some are for baptizing all Children others none but the Children of Believers 5. One says if either of their Parents are Believers they may be baptized some say both Father and Mother both must be godly Persons and in the Covenant of Grace or else the Child has no Right to be baptized No marvel when Men have lost their way they are thus lost in a Wilderness That Ordinancé God has made no Promise to Persons in their Obedience thereto nor denounced any Threatning or Punishment on such who slight neglect and contemn it it is no Ordinance of God. But God has made no Promise to Persons who baptize their Children nor denounced no Threatning or Panishment on those who slight neglect and contemn it Ergo Infant-Baptism is no Ordinance of God. Let any such who assert Infant-Baptism shew us a Promise to the Obedient herein or a Threatning denounced against the Disobedient thereto and we will say no more There are Promises made to Believers in their being baptized that 's evident and Punishments threatned on such who reject the Counsel of God in that respect the like there is in respect of any other Gospel-Ordinance but none of this in the Case of Infant-Baptism CHAP. X. Wherein the great Arguments and pretended Scripture-Proofs for Infant-Baptism concerning the Covenant Circumcision and Infants Church-membership are Examined and Answered ONE main and great Argument the Pedobaptists bring for that practice is this viz. Children of Believers are in Covenant as well as their Parents The Covenant made with Abraham was the Covenant of Grace or Gospel-Covenant to which the Seal of Circumcision was annexed and as Circumcision belonged to the Children of the
20. Jesus ge doopt zijnde is terstont opge-klommon uit het Water And when Jesus was dipp'd he came out of the Water hence they for John the Baptist read John the Dipper and for he baptized them he dipp'd them Why our Translators who have been so faithful and exact generally in all things as is acknowledged by all Learned Godly Men in the translating the holy Bible should leave the word Baptism it being a Greek Word and not translate it into our Language as the Dutch have done into theirs I know not unless it were to favour their own Practice of Bantising or Sprinkling which the word Baptize will in no wise bear as is confest by a whole cloud of Witnesses Mr. Ball in his Catechism renders it washing by Dipping See also Dr. Ames in his Marrow of Divinity Mr. Wilson in his Dictionary saith to baptize is to dip into the Water or to plunge one into the Water Also in the Common-Prayer-Book dipping into the Water is given as the proper and primary Signification of the word We will leave this to the Consideration of all thinking Men it being so i. e. that Baptism is Dipping or Plunging the Body all over in Water whether Infants can be the Subjects of it sith their tender Bodies cannot bear being plunged thus into the Water in cold Climates without palpable danger of their Lives CHAP. III. Proving that Baptism is dipping plunging and covering the Body all over in Water from the Practice of the Primitive Times CErtainly no better course or way in the next place we can take to find out what Baptism is than to examine the Scripture and see what the thing was which the Saints practised in the Primitive Time where we read they did baptize or were baptized for as the Jews in Circumcision all along were to practise that Rite as it was commanded and practised by Abraham and keep the Passeover as it was given to them from the Lord by Moses together with all other Ordinances and Services whatsoever it behoved them to observe the first or Primitive Institution and Practice of every particular Duty and were not to derogate from thence in any thing whatsoever and for their adulterating any of the Ordinances of God they brought themselves under the Wrath of God and many heavy Judgments from him as the Old Testament doth sufficiently witness so it behoveth us I say to see to the first or Primary Institution and Practice of Baptism in the Gospel-Time that being a Pattern or Rule to us and to all Christians to the end of the World in respect of every Gospel-Ordinance and if we derogate from that Rule we must expect to meet with sharp Rebuke from the Almighty first or last Now that that Ordinance which is called Baptism is Immersion Dipping or Plunging into Water will appear if we observe the Practice of John the Baptist who was the first that was sent by Christ to baptize read Mat. 3. 6. he 't is positively said baptized in a River viz. in the River Jordan Diodate on this place in his Annotations saith he plunged them in Water and our late Annotators say he dipp'd them in Jordan Moreover 't is said that John was baptizing in Aenon near Salim the Reason is given because there was much Water Now if it had not been dipping or covering the Body in Water this could be no reason for a little Water would have served to sprinkle thousands as Cornelius à Lapide notes Piscator on this Passage saith that Baptism was dipping the Body in Water Also our late Annotators upon the place say thus viz. It is from hence apparent that both Christ and John baptized by dipping the Body in the Water else they need not have sought places where had been a great plenty of Water They say well and less they could not speak unless they would stifle their Consciences or offer Violence to their Reason but if they had from hence said it is apparent that Christ and John Baptized and not Rantized Persons they had come off better and had undeceived the People Secondly 'T is said when our blessed Saviour was baptized by John in Jordan he went up straightway out of the Water c. and Philip and the Eunuch 't is said went both down into the Water and that they came up out of the Water The Assembly in their Annotations on this Text say they were wont to dip the whole Body and Piscator on the place as I find him quoted by a worthy Divine saith the ancient manner of Baptism was that the whole Body was dipp'd into the Water Certainly it had been a vain and weak thing for them to have gone down into the River to be sprinkled with a little Water There is no ground to think they would ever have done so if Sprinkling or Rantism had been the Ordinance required of them the manner was not to apply Water to the Subject as some do but the Subject to nay into the Water In Mark 1. 9. 'T is said Jesus was baptized of John in Jordan Now saith one on this place it had been non-sense for Mark to say that Jesus was baptized in Jordan if it had been sprinkling because the Greek reads it into Jordan 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 could Jesus be said to be sprinkled into Jordan 't is proper to say he was baptiz'd that is dipp'd into Jordan and that was the Act and nothing else as all the Learned acknowledg Moreover Philip needed not to have put that noble Person who was a Man of great Authority under Candace Queen of the Ethiopians to the trouble to come out of his Chariot if Sprinkling had been Baptism and to go into the Water and dip him or if Sprinkling might have done as well as Dipping sure Philp would on this occasion have dispensed with Immersion and let Rantism have served considering he was a great Man and on a Journey he might have fetch'd a little Water in his hand and have sprinkled him in the Chariot But as Philip had preach'd Baptism to him so there is like ground to think that the Eunuch very well understood what it was and readily submitted to it but if Sprinkling would not excuse them I know not how any Christian can think it may excuse us in these days we have no Reason to think Christ Jesus or his Apostles did do or teach any thing in vain yet so we must conclude if he went into a River to receive no more than Sprinkling and so we must think of Philip and the Eunuch also But to proceed here I cannot well omit that which Mr. Daniel Rogers a most worthy English Writer hath said in a Treatise of his It ought saith he to be the Churches part to cleave to the Institution which is Dipping especially it being not left arbitrary by our Church to the Discretion of the Minister but required to dip or dive And further saith that he betrays
against those of your Perswasion Answ 1. The more cause of Grief But what though I must tell you God's Word is to be your Guide and not Men every Man must give an account to God for himself Moreover some Godly Men who have had great Light and were glorious Reformers too in their day yet lay short of some great Things and Duties as Jehosaphat c. who did not remove nor pull down the high Places 2. Light and Knowledg of Divine Truths have broken forth gradually When Reformation first begun those godly Men laboured to restore the doctrinal part of the Gospel and yet great Corruptions remained in point of Discipline which Errors God hath since by degrees discovered 3. Had the best and late Reformers for such you will find at last the Baptists to be in point of the Administrations of God's House and holy Temple been generally learned Men 't is very like this Truth would have been more readily received among such I mean learned Persons than we see now it is so hard a thing is Self-denial 4. Moreover the base Reproaches cast upon the true way of Baptizing hath doubtless laid a great many of good Men under Temptations there being hardly any one Truth that has been rendered more odious and contemptible than Baptizing i e. dipping of Men and Women in Water tho 't is generally acknowledged by all that no other Action then that was practised in the Gospel-days in the Administration of this Ordinance 5. Some say those Errors or unsound Principles as I look upon them to be maintained by divers Baptists who I doubt not are godly Christians have likewise hindred the Reception and Promulgation of this blessed Gospel-Institution among many worthy Persons and kept them may be from indeavouring their Satisfaction herein tho 't is strange that should be a stumbling Block to any sith there were many Christians in the Apostles Times who in many things did dissent and differ in as great matters one from another besides there are Men almost of all Perswasions that hold those very Principles 6. Others think the Remisness of some of the Baptized Churches about taking care of their Ministers hath contributed something to it also for nothing lies more clear in God's Word than that those who preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel yea have a comfortable Maintenance i. e. that they may be wholly sequestred to the Work of the Ministry and be in a capacity to give to others and so shew themselves Examples in Hospitality and that their poor Wives and Children after their Decease may not be exposed to Want and Poverty But I am glad to see it our Churches are now daily enlightned into this indispensable Duty and do endeavour to reform accordingly and would they also labour to follow the Primitive Saints in singing of Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs I do not doubt but it would add to their Comfort and Glory and many more than now do would joyn with us 7. But to proceed Be sure the Examples of the best Men under Heaven will never be a Plea sufficient for any in the day of Judgment in doing any thing in God's Worship that he has not commanded or given grounds for the Observation of or in their neglecting doing of that which he hath expresly required Shall any be allowed at the last day to plead thus viz. such and such good Men and able Ministers did say this was a Truth and my Duty surely no. 8. When Reformation is required of Men in so great a case as this viz. that which tends to the razing the whole Constitution or standing of their Church which has been also of such a long continuation it calls for great Resolution Courage and Self-denial which is hard for some Men to arrive at considering also what great Persons and Reformers have been on their side and they not seriously minding the words of the wise Man where he says that the Path of the Just is as a shining Light that shineth more and more to the perfect day the Church as it was then look'd out of the Wilderness but as the Morning and but as fair comparatively as the Moon but since blessed be God greater Light hath broken forth yea to such a degree that now she seems to be come forth as clear as the Sun c. And sad it is to see Men content themselves to walk only in that Light those worthy Christians had in the Morning of the Reformation and refuse to follow and embrace a higher and more clear and Sun-sshining Glory They might be accepted then since their Day did not afford greater Manifestations of Truth in those respects but it may not excuse our Brethren nor may they be accepted in following them sith Truth is broke forth more perspicuously in these latter times Object The People called Anabaptists lie under great Reproaches as if you baptiz'd People naked Answ 'T is no more than our Saviour foretold should befal his own People and faithful Followers They shall speak all manner of Evilâ— against you falsty for my Name sake c. I am not ignorant what odious Lies and Reproaches have been cast upon us in respect of baptizing Men and Women naked whereas 't is notoriously known to be utterly false and abominable which thousands can testify to the contrary who are of different Perswasions to us who daily see Persons of both Sexes baptized by us always in very comely and decent Garments provided on purpose upon that account Object You have been formerly stigmatized and accused as if you were against Magistrates or refuse to obey Kings and such as are in Authority and refuse lawful Oaths What say you to the Munster-Story Answ These things our Enemies know to be false and vile Slanders our Confessions of Faith from time to time do witness the contrary What People plead for Subjection to Government and Magistrates which God has set over us more than we always do And as touching that old Munster-Story of John of Leyden c. they that read the best Histories of that business may find many things to be false which are charged against those Anabaptists besides the Story of them was either written as some have very well observed by the malicious Papists their old mortal Enemies or else by envious Protestants who are willing to take up any base Reports and improve thoâ—e Sâ—â—ries to blast the Reputation of the whole Party Alas I could here soon recite some Writings of inveterated Spirits who have in as base a manner vilisied and calumniated the Episcopals nay and the Presbyterians and Independents also giving Instances both in respect of their vile Principles and Practices Certainly 't is a shame for any good Men to take up a Charge against so great a Party of godly Christians from the venemous Pens of such shameless Persons But suppose the Munster-Story as to matter of Fact were true and that some of